Model Based Analysis

Model based analysis is a method of analysis that uses modeling to perform the analysis and capture and communicate the results. For social problems the two main forms of modeling used are causal loop diagrams and simulation modeling. Causal loop diagrams are used for preliminary conceptual attacks on the problem. This gives way to simulation models for the rest of the work. Thwink.org has selected system dynamics as the most appropriate simulation modeling tool, due to its simplicity, power, and emphasis on feedback loops.

Model based analysis is the third of the three main tools in our toolkit for solving difficult social problems. The process used, the System Improvement Process, requires model based analysis to execute the process. The process uses a series of steps to ask questions, such as What are the feedback loops that are currently dominant and causing problem symptoms? A model is built to answer the questions.

The three main tools diagram explains why the three tools are required. Difficult social problems like sustainability are so difficult they require all three tools to solve. That these tools have not been applied to the sustainability problem as a whole explains why past solutions have failed. The carpenter has been using the wrong tools for the job.

Here's a story about two carpenters who used the right tool for the job:

How the Wright brothers used model based analysis

In 1903 the Wright brothers were the first to make a sustained, controlled flight with a heavier-than-air motorized aircraft with a pilot aboard. Many had tried before and failed because unlike the Wright brothers, they did not use a sufficient amount of model based analysis.

To solve the problem of how to fly without killing themselves, as was all too common then, Orville and Wilbur Wright built a series of models to analyze their many subproblems and solve them: 1

1. In 1899 a five foot long box kite allowed testing wing warping as a way to achieve flight control. Strings attached to the kite could twist its wings. The model showed that wing warping could cause controlled banking to the left or right.

2. In 1900 a full sized glider was used as a kite to further test wing warping and lift. This was done at Kitty Hawk to take advantage of the area's strong breezes. Some flights were made as a true glider with Wilbur aboard. "The brothers were encouraged because the craft's front elevator worked well and they had no accidents."

3. In 1901 they built a miniature airfoil and tested it by mounting it in front of a bicycle. Model testing showed that published data on lift was unreliable, so the Wright brothers begin developing their own data, later perfected in the wind tunnel.

4. Realizing that full sized glider models were expensive and time consuming, they build a six foot wind tunnel and began systematically testing different miniature wing designs. The data and conclusions improved lift, the lift-to-drag ratio, and control in their 1902 full size glider model.

5. In 1902 they designed a new full sized glider and tested it. Improvements were made. The vertical rudder was made movable to improve control. A long series of model tests, between 700 and 1,000 glides, were made. All the problems of lift and steering were worked out using roll, pitch, and yaw controls. Their final conclusion was they were now ready to try a machine powered flying aeroplane.

6. In early 1903 further wind tunnel testing was done on propeller models. The data was used to design the critical part of machine powered flight: the propeller. Two eight foot propellers were built, one for each side, rotating in opposite directions to prevent torque. Model based analysis had now solved all their major subproblems.

7. No lightweight motors were available, so Charlie Taylor, their shop mechanic, built one in six weeks. The first Flyer was assembled. It weighed only 605 pounds. On December 17, 1903 four successful flights into a 27 mile per hour headwind were made. The final flight traveled 852 feet in 59 seconds.

The problem of human aviation was at last solved. The Wright brother's use of model based analysis allowed them to penetrate the superficial layer of the problem and work on fundamental layer.

Their work was so elegant, so correct, and so well solved the root causes of the problem that a century later we find this quote:

To simply say that the Wright Brothers invented the airplane doesn't begin to describe their many accomplishments. Nor is it especially accurate. The first fixed-wing aircraft — a kite mounted on a stick — was conceived and flown almost a century before Orville and Wilbur made their first flights. The Wrights were first to design and build a flying craft that could be controlled while in the air. Every successful aircraft ever built since, beginning with the 1902 Wright glider, has had controls to roll the wings right or left, pitch the nose up or down, and yaw the nose from side to side. These three controls — roll, pitch, and yaw — let a pilot navigate an airplane in all three dimensions, making it possible to fly from place to place. The entire aerospace business, the largest industry in the world, depends on this simple but brilliant idea. 2

"Before the Wright Brothers, no one working in aviation did anything fundamentally correct. Since the Wright Brothers, no one has done anything fundamentally different." – Darrel Collins, US Park Service Kitty Hawk National Historic Park

The only way to perform the process is to use model based analysis. The System Improvement Process (SIP) first divides one big problem into the three substeps present in all difficult social problems. The for each subproblem it performs the four main steps of SIP:

D. Find the feedback loops that should be dominant to resolve the root causes.

E. Find the high leverage points to make those loops go dominant.

Modeling is required to find the feedback loops in substeps A and D. It's also required to find the low and high leverage points in substeps C and E, since a leverage point is a place on a system's structure where a solution element can be applied. Most important of all, modeling is required to find the root causes in substep B.

Thus model driven analysis is essential, not just for solving the How to Fly an Airplane Problem without killing yourself, but for solving the How to Fly Spaceship Earth Problem sustainably.

Are you as concerned as we are about the rise of populust authoritarians like Donald Trump? Have you noticed that democracy is unable to solve important problems like climate change, war, and poverty? If so this film series is for you!

Why is democracy in crisis? One intermediate cause is a weakened Voter Feedback Loop. Powerful root cause forces are working to weaken the loop.

The most eye-opening article on the site since it was written in December 2005. More people have contacted us about this easy to read paper and the related Dueling Loops videos than anything else on the site.

Do you every wonder why the sustainability problem is so impossibly hard to solve? It's because of the phenomenon of change resistance. The system itself, and not just individual social agents, is strongly resisting change. Why this is so, its root causes, and several potential solutions are presented.

The analysis was performed over a seven year period from 2003 to 2010. The results are summarized in the Summary of Analysis Results, the top of which is shown below:

Click on the table for the full table and a high level discussion of analysis results.

The Universal Causal Chain

This is the solution causal chain present in all problems. Popular approaches to solving the sustainability problem see only what's obvious: the black arrows. This leads to using superficial solutions to push on low leverage points to resolve intermediate causes.

Popular solutions are superficial because they fail to see into the fundamental layer, where the complete causal chain runs to root causes. It's an easy trap to fall into because it intuitively seems that popular solutions like renewable energy and strong regulations should solve the sustainability problem. But they can't, because they don't resolve the root causes.

In the analytical approach, root cause analysis penetrates the fundamental layer to find the well hidden red arrow. Further analysis finds the blue arrow.Fundamental solution elements are then developed to create the green arrow which solves the problem. For more see Causal Chain in the glossary.

This is no different from what the ancient Romans did. It’s a strategy of divide and conquer. Subproblems like these are several orders of magnitude easier to solve because you are no longer trying (in vain) to solve them simultaneously without realizing it. This strategy has changed millions of other problems from insolvable to solvable, so it should work here too.

For example, multiplying 222 times 222 in your head is for most of us impossible. But doing it on paper, decomposing the problem into nine cases of 2 times 2 and then adding up the results, changes the problem from insolvable to solvable.

Change resistance is the tendency for a system to resist change even when a surprisingly large amount of force is applied.

Overcoming change resistance is the crux of the problem, because if the system is resisting change then none of the other subproblems are solvable. Therefore this subproblem must be solved first. Until it is solved, effort to solve the other three subproblems is largely wasted effort.

The root cause of successful change resistance appears to be effective deception in the political powerplace. Too many voters and politicians are being deceived into thinking sustainability is a low priority and need not be solved now.

The high leverage point for resolving the root cause is to raise general ability to detect political deception. We need to inoculate people against deceptive false memes because once people are infected by falsehoods, it’s very hard to change their minds to see the truth.

Life form improper coupling occurs when two social life forms are not working together in harmony.

In the sustainability problem, large for-profit corporations are not cooperating smoothly with people. Instead, too many corporations are dominating political decision making to their own advantage, as shown by their strenuous opposition to solving the environmental sustainability problem.

The root cause appears to be mutually exclusive goals. The goal of the corporate life form is maximization of profits, while the goal of the human life form is optimization of quality of life, for those living and their descendents. These two goals cannot be both achieved in the same system. One side will win and the other side will lose. Guess which side is losing?

The high leverage point for resolving the root cause follows easily. If the root cause is corporations have the wrong goal, then the high leverage point is to reengineer the modern corporation to have the right goal.

The world’s solution model for solving important problems like sustainability, recurring wars, recurring recessions, excessive economic inequality, and institutional poverty has drifted so far it’s unable to solve the problem.

The root cause appears to be low quality of governmental political decisions. Various steps in the decision making process are not working properly, resulting in inability to proactively solve many difficult problems.

This indicates low decision making process maturity. The high leverage point for resolving the root cause is to raise the maturity of the political decision making process.

In the environmental proper coupling subproblem the world’s economic system is improperly coupled to the environment. Environmental impact from economic system growth has exceeded the capacity of the environment to recycle that impact.

This subproblem is what the world sees as the problem to solve. The analysis shows that to be a false assumption, however. The change resistance subproblem must be solved first.

The root cause appears to be high transaction costs for managing common property (like the air we breath). This means that presently there is no way to manage common property efficiently enough to do it sustainably.

The high leverage point for resolving the root cause is to allow new types of social agents (such as new types of corporations) to appear, in order to radically lower transaction costs.

Solutions

There must be a reason popular solutions are not working.

Given the principle that all problems arise from their root causes, the reason popular solutions are not working (after over 40 years of millions of people trying) is popular solutions do not resolve root causes.

This is Thwink.org’s most fundamental insight.

Summary of Solution Elements

Using the results of the analysis as input, 12 solutions elements were developed. Each resolves a specific root cause and thus solves one of the four subproblems, as shown below:

Click on the table for a high level discussion of the solution elements and to learn how you can hit the bullseye.

The 4 Subproblems

The solutions you are about to see differ radically from popular solutions, because each resolves a specific root cause for a single subproblem. The right subproblems were found earlier in the analysis step, which decomposed the one big Gordian Knot of a problem into The Four Subproblems of the Sustainability Problem.

Everything changes with a root cause resolution approach. You are no longer firing away at a target you can’t see. Once the analysis builds a model of the problem and finds the root causes and their high leverage points, solutions are developed to push on the leverage points.

Because each solution is aimed at resolving a specific known root cause, you can't miss. You hit the bullseye every time. It's like shooting at a target ten feet away. The bullseye is the root cause. That's why Root Cause Analysis is so fantastically powerful.

The high leverage point for overcoming change resistance is to raise general ability to detect political deception. We have to somehow make people truth literate so they can’t be fooled so easily by deceptive politicians.

This will not be easy. Overcoming change resistance is the crux of the problem and must be solved first, so it takes nine solution elements to solve this subproblem. The first is the key to it all.

B. How to Achieve Life Form Proper Coupling

In this subproblem the analysis found that two social life forms, large for-profit corporations and people, have conflicting goals. The high leverage point is correctness of goals for artificial life forms. Since the one causing the problem right now is Corporatis profitis, this means we have to reengineer the modern corporation to have the right goal.

Corporations were never designed in a comprehensive manner to serve the people. They evolved. What we have today can be called Corporation 1.0. It serves itself. What we need instead is Corporation 2.0. This life form is designed to serve people rather than itself. Its new role will be that of a trusted servant whose goal is providing the goods and services needed to optimize quality of life for people in a sustainable manner.

What’s drifted too far is the decision making model that governments use to decide what to do. It’s incapable of solving the sustainability problem.

The high leverage point is to greatly improve the maturity of the political decision making process. Like Corporation 1.0, the process was never designed. It evolved. It’s thus not quite what we want.

The solution works like this: Imagine what it would be like if politicians were rated on the quality of their decisions. They would start competing to see who could improve quality of life and the common good the most. That would lead to the most pleasant Race to the Top the world has ever seen.

Presently the world’s economic system is improperly coupled to the environment. The high leverage point is allow new types of social agents to appear to radically reduce the cost of managing the sustainability problem.

This can be done with non-profit stewardship corporations. Each steward would have the goal of sustainably managing some portion of the sustainability problem. Like the way corporations charge prices for their goods and services, stewards would charge fees for ecosystem service use. The income goes to solving the problem.

Corporations gave us the Industrial Revolution. That revolution is incomplete until stewards give us the Sustainability Revolution.

This analyzes the world’s standard political system and explains why it’s operating for the benefit of special interests instead of the common good. Several sample solutions are presented to help get you thwinking.

Note how generic most of the tools/concepts are. They apply to far more than the sustainability problem. Thus the glossary is really The Problem Solver's Guide to Difficult Social System Problems, using the sustainability problem as a running example.